Internet activism

Who you gonna call?

CHINA’S internet users can quickly form a mob. Leaders sometimes have to decide equally fast whether to block calls for justice or accede to them, sometimes by throwing an official to the pack.

On May 3rd one online movement added an unusual twist: taking its case to the American government by setting up a petition on the White House’s official website. More than 135,000 people have signed, demanding that President Obama “investigate and deport” a suspect in the unsolved case of the poisoning of a university student in China in 1994.

The case involves Zhu Ling, then a promising student at Beijing’s Tsinghua University. Ms Zhu was believed to have been poisoned with thallium, and has been incapacitated and brain damaged ever since. A then-roommate of Ms Zhu was questioned about the case and released. She has long asserted her innocence, but for years complaints have circulated online that she was protected because of her family’s political connections, and that she is now living in America under an assumed name. The petition has gained support as a result of moving footage of Ms Zhu’s life posted on the internet, and through the urging of Chinese celebrities such as Yao Chen, an actress, who has tweeted about it to the 45m followers of her microblog.

In recent days Chinese internet users have begun to petition the White House on other issues; for instance, asking President Obama to “remonstrate” with China over a proposed paraxylene chemical plant in the south-western city of Kunming, where thousands of people staged a protest on May 4th. Others are more frivolous, asking America to send troops to liberate Hong Kong, or that the official flavour of tofu be designated as sweet rather than salty.

The petitions obviously have no legal force, but they reflect a popular lack of faith in Chinese justice and the seductive soft power of America. China has a petitioning system of its own, but those who use it are often threatened or detained.

The official Chinese reaction has also been revealing. On May 3rd censors blocked searches and censored posts about Ms Zhu’s case, but as the online furore grew, the floodgates were opened. On May 7th Global Times, a state-run newspaper, wrote that the White House cannot be China’s foreign petition-office but that, in the internet age, cases such as Ms Zhu’s “need not be covered up”.

It becomes hard to convince people elsewhere that they should look up to your government when there is such striking evidence that your own people do not. "Embarrassing" does not begin to describe having this happen.

Loss of confidence in justice in China is one of the reasons why the White House website is targeted by Chinese petitioners. But the Zhu’s case is complicated, and the lesson to be drawn is as follows;

1). The quicker the investigations are carried out, the better. Volatile substances of detrimental stress were associated with the case, which makes it irreparable to clear up the case if under such natural consequences.
2). The engagement of the third party. The emergence of the third party investigation is an alternative to intervene the case of this sort, and that is in agreement with international convention.

On the other side of the picture shows a farce by petitioners from China, and they may have forgotten the simple fact that the US president is not elected by Chinese voters; or they just used the WePeople as an outlet to vent, IMHP.

"[the suspected murderer] is now living in America under an assumed name"

this is why its actually logical for the Chinese netizens to petition America. The 135,000 signatures our not solely due to frustrations with the Chinese political system. I'd wager many of the Chinese signatories believe America is complicit in the cover up.